It's spring around here:)
So I thought you'd like this article:
And here, any competent Bible student can see that the feministic stance on the sexual and emotional obligations of spouses is exactly the reverse of the case, if anything. The Bible, and the Christian tradition as a consequence, clearly holds that sex (and the fruit that ordinarily comes from it) is the primary, distinctive feature of marriage. Marriage is designed to be the place where sex happens. Marriage and sex are not the same thing, but the latter is a necessary condition and the primary reason for the former. Marriage is meant to channel the incredible power of human sexuality into a constructive force- biologically, psychologically, and socially. When the heat of sexuality is allowed to run outside of marriage, it is inevitably a destructive fire. And of course, having a marriage without sex, is like building a forge to do basket weaving. So it shouldn’t be controversial to say that by design sex should be happening in marriage. Which means spouses owe conjugal relations to each other. They are in fact entitled to sex with their mate.
For all the women out there who apparently hate the very idea of having s8xual relationship with their (prospective) husbands: why don't you go join the nunnery? Seriously though, depriving your spouse is a just cause for divorce. When we abolish no-fault divorce, it'll be one of the divorce grounds again.
Hat tip to Will from Patriactionary
I would suggest that most women would have sex much more happily, if men actually wanted biblical sex, and weren't ruined by "adult material".
ReplyDeleteI mean, in biblical sense, all sex that couldn't be reproductive in any case, is sinful. Meaning putting things where they do not belong, pardon me being vulgar. Things like that are just masturbation with other person's body.
On the other hand, women shouldn't be Lilith's.
My personal conviction and experience is, that if we embrace our biblical roles even in bedroom, all will be well.
Wow! Blame the men! What about romance novels for women? Such a stupid comment. And there is zero evidence an allegedly supreme being is concerned about whether sex procreates or not. Stupidity like this comment are why I am not Christian and never will be, but I know I'm better than most of them.
DeleteTexan, this is a Roman Catholic teaching (invented by men, btw, since their hierarchy is all male). Catholics are supposed to follow it, though many don't, of course. But it's not a general Christian teaching, as I mentioned in one of my comments. Also, I don't get it why so many men attack romantic novels. They may be stupid but hardly comparable to p0rn.
DeleteI attack romance novels because they do cater to women with their stupid cover art and please don't tell me they don't use creative language to get across a romantic point. I'm not for banning that or all pictures necessarily, but give me a break here. What annoys me to is that she is implying that all of us men expect women to be models. For me, I can find an older woman attractive and appealing even with a bit of wrinkles, so say us men are all after 20 year olds is kind of dumb, though biologically we may prefer that. Her comment is such typical guilt shaming of men and I resent it.
DeleteWell, if you mean "erotic" novels (which many of the so-called romance novels are), than I agree. However, some will even object to Jane Austen.
DeleteBlanka can speak for herself, of course, however, I understood her comment differently. I thought she meant that men watch p0rn and then expect their wives to do the same kind of acts, while many of them are forbidden by the Catholic Church.
"then"
DeleteI think both mates should make an effort to appeal physically to each other within the bounds of age and physical abilities, but I can tell you that if men were getting some of that action in adult films from their wives society would be a lot better off. Yes, I know, some women are not mature enough to acknowledge that, but it's the truth. For me, I liked my bedroom fun, but also liked holding hands in public while walking and spending time together.
DeleteTexan, the problem is that RC Church teaches that certain acts are mortal sin, and you will go straight to Hell if you engage in them (unless you confess, do penance etc etc). Which I then pointed out that other churches do not teach the same sort of thing, hence the whole discussion. Personally I'm not a Catholic but I won't tell other people what to do because I believe in freedom of conscience.
DeleteI agree with your comment.
DeleteI live in the South Texas region, and it's sad how many alleged RC's who are of Mexican American descent insist on voting for a party that advocates outright infanticide at this point. They have also had traditionally a higher unmarried pregnancy count.
Anyway, I never felt bad doing things that my girlfriend was agreeable to or even suggested herself.
And from my perspective much of the RC stuff on sexuality between heterosexual couples makes zero sense to me. However, even the Protestant churches have confused the government nonsense of a marriage license with a marriage through the church which is what that was for most of European history with the influence of Christianity.
We have to thank Napoleon Bonaparte for the secularisation. He occupied half of Europe with his troops, including my country, and all the laws were changed. For instance, education was a religious matter, too. Churches had schools of their own. At least, in the USA you can get married in the church. Here you have to get married by the government official first, and then in the church (officially it's called getting a blessing, btw, not even a church marriage). The point is, someone has to enforce the marriage contract (what's left of it). In pre-Christian Europe it was done by the family, later by the church and now by the state. The same with charity.
DeleteI don't know if it's all for the worse though, cause I have known older folks who absolutely hated church because in the good old times it distributed welfare and they felt slighted/humiliated.
BTW, it's nice to know you don't mind older women. Cause internet told me all the women hit the wall at their 30th birthday and the best thing they could do after this is go jump off the cliff since no self-respecting man will ever fancy them again;)
DeleteWell, you see, Blanka, it's complicated.
ReplyDeleteRoman Catholic Church has a quite restrictive position on the issue and only allows NFP. While most other churches disagree. An Eastern Ortho priest, for instance, famously said that the Church doesn't tell people how to eat their steak, raw, medium or well-done. They forbid 8nal, but allow everything else, and any non-abortifacient contraception method, which includes coitus interruptus, btw, the thing the Catholic Church is adamantly against. They view mast8rbation as sin, but not mutual m8sturbation. Protestants are often even more permissive. A Lutheran pastor I linked to a couple of times, said that it was the husband's discretion to decide what's appropriate.
So the conclusion is, first, when in doubt, follow the teaching of your church. And second, when choosing the marriage partner, find one who agrees with you on this very important and often, contentious issue.
I think RC church might have a point in their approach to contraceptive methods. Because most of those methods just ruin the experience for both husband and wife. Coitus intteruptus seems like torture to the poor man. And apparenlty the pill usually makes women loose their "appetite", so...
DeleteThey allow counting safe days, because it is a huge sacrifice not to have sex when she is usually most willing.
I won't attack Catholic Church over here. I'd just like to point out that their teachings on human s8xuality aren't shared by other denominations.
DeleteI appreciate Blanka's position, and she's probably right about *some* men having their proclivities damaged by "adult material", but my suspicion is that for the vast majority of average Christian husbands, they'd be happy if their wives would be willing to regularly engage in "old fashioned, vanilla" s8x.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I am naive, but I do not believe that devout husbands are, writ large, on pR0n, even when being deprived. I suspect far more are being deprived than are on pR0n.
I ran a tiny test case yesterday. Sent that article to a LOT of women. 30, maybe more. All devout. I got hearty "amens!" from a grand total of 6. From 3, I got, "Wow. I'd actually never considered some of this. Thank you!"
The rest: crickets. I'm hoping that means they were contemplating, but I suspect a good chunk were actively ignoring the message.
I disagree with Blanka's 1st point. My evidence for this is that if you ask men who have been married how often there is sex in marriage. The newly weds will say often, those over 5 years will say once a month or so, and those over twenty years will say on their birthdays if they are lucky. Every single guy, even the abominations who go after other men want and need sex often. I don't doubt most men want to try things with their wives, nor do I doubt there is a lot of use of porn, even in marriage. However there was a fellow who said the following which I think explains a lot. For men when their wives have sex with them it is akin to them telling their husbands I love you and showing it too. While periods where it is put to the side or she is sick is understandable, when there are vast stretches where she refuses again and again. It is akin to telling their husbands I don't love you. She can physically say the words till she is blue in the face, but her actions speak differently. I highly suspect this is why we are told the following.
ReplyDelete1st Corinthians 7:4-5 "The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency."
As another fellow pointed out, and I think it is a true statement, if a sad one. If a man isn't getting it from his wife, at some point he will seek it out form other sources. I would go further and say if a wife isn't getting attention from her husband she is also likely to seek it out from others. All in all today relations between men and women are in a sad state of affairs.
- W
I checked some statistics, because I wanted to prove mr W wrong, but apparently he is right. In my country, women have in general 3,6 intercourses per month. But it is not evenly distributed, but Pareto's law works here too: 20 % of people have 80 percent of all intercourses, and apparently almost half of the married couples have it "sometimes and at Christmas" as we say in here. I never knew that people are so miserable in their marriages, poor things. I always thought these conversations were about men who are not happy with 2-3 times a week, or want something weird.
DeleteI also agree that having sex with your husband is, from man's point of view, the most important way to telling him you love him. When woman says no to sex, man apparently feels she says no to his whole being.
No wonder many women are such insufferable witches nowadays, they simply don't get enough action, lol!
DeleteSanne, a question if you will. I noticed you are ... editing the spelling of certain words. Are you wanting us to do this as well in the comments? - W
ReplyDeleteElspeth, if they didn't like this article I can only imagine what their reaction would be to that Orthodox priest I quoted, who literally said that the one who denies one's spouse will be held responsible if the said spouse commits adultery, and that outside disease and priests' religious duties there is no legit reasons to deny s8x to your spouse. Of course, he wasn't an American;) I guess that's why Roosh turned Eastern Orthodox in the end:)
ReplyDeleteAnon, I can understand that when the couple have several small children they can be too overwhelmed for this kind of thing, but the middle-aged folks whose children are grown have really no excuse, do they?
ReplyDeleteAlso, the reason I edit certain words is because there are filters which will screen out certain websites due to their explicit content. They are often installed in schools, at the working places etc. Plus, it could attract wrong kind of bots. As long as there is no open swearing I won't censor the comments, though.
ReplyDelete